Legal Opinion
Abrams v. Bendix Home Appliances, Inc.
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided March 13, 1951PublishedCited by 27 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
WEINFELD, District Judge.
In this action to prevent and restrain alleged violation by defendant of the antitrust laws and to recover treble damages thereunder, both jurisdiction and venue are predicated on Section 12 of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C.A. § 22. 1
Service of the summons and complaint was made upon an officer of defendant at its principal place of business, South Bend, Indiana, following which defendant moved (1) to quash the service of process and to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction of the person ; and (2) to dismiss for improper venue. The matter originally came on before District…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Eastman Kodak Co. v. Southern Photo Materials Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1927
- United States v. Scophony Corp. of AmericaSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
- Hutchinson v. Chase & Gilbert, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1930
- Bank of America v. Whitney Central National BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1923
- United States v. National City Lines, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1949
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by27 opinions
- Hoffman Motors Corporation v. Alfa Romeo SpADistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1965
- California Clippers, Inc. v. United States Soccer Football Ass'nDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1970
- Friends of Animals, Inc. v. American Veterinary Medical Ass'nDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1970
- Anderson-Friberg, Inc. v. Justin R. Clary & Son, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1951
- Wentling v. Popular Science Publishing CompanyDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1959
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.